• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

99%: "Walk Money Out of the Banks to Credit Unions on Bank Transfer Day"

Come, now, VanceMack. Commercial banks have the advantage of being nationwide, available in every community large or small.

Not every commercial bank is nationwide, there are alot of regional banks too. Keybank in the Northeast being one example.
 
Now it gets real! People do have have the power.

[/I]

I was already planning to, separate from this Occupy Wall Street business. My bank is going to start charging all sorts of fees. I'm belong to a credit union already, but had kept my bank account because the ATM is conveniently all across my town; but fudge it.
 
No so...most of us recognize that whiny unthinking losers cover the entire spectrum of age and race. While not all or even most of the lower 50% support the 'movement', theres a whole lot of suck in that lower 50% very appropriately entitled 'movement'.

If your sole purpose in posting is to denounce the movement, feel free I suppose. However, I think you'd be better off trying to understand these people and see things from their perspective. As I've said before when speaking of the movement, it's not that these people are anti-capitalist but rather that they are anti-corruption. And a large part of the corruption has come through the banking system. To understand it, you have to understand that our entire economic policy for nearly 30 years has been based on financial services - consumption - primarily with the focus on our homes, i.e., how we furnish them, repair them, use them as "revolving credit". Of course, the other side has long been how we as a nation have come to rely so heavily on credit. As such, banks have taken advantage of this "national consumption based on credit" and a large part of that deals with bank transaction fees each time you use your credit or debit card. Why do you think the banks are scrambling now to raise money through retail purchases on debit/credit cards but are so willing not to charge their members for using their ATM machines? Why are they not placing limits on the amounts people keep in their checking or savings account and charging their customers if they fall below that limit? Granted, such limits usually were low - $500-$1,000 - but lately you've had banks increase that limit to $3,000 or more.

I think it was Mellie who made the point that these new fees would only hurt people who had savings/checking accounts below...5-figures. She makes a good point. However, remove enough of the common man's money out of the banking system in one foul swoop and you effectively hurt the financial system.

Never under estimate the leveraging power of the majority.
 
Yikes...I hope you agree with her that the people that are clamoring to take their money out of banks and falling all over themselves to protest Wall Street are idiots (like you feel about the Tea Party folks). Otherwise...better duck...Danarhea is going to call you an idiot and a ****ing hypocrite. You disgust him and he will want to puke on you.

actually, i no longer think about the tea party, although i do know that movement may have started out as grassroots but was quickly co-opted. but to pretend that one group are idiots and the other are not is laughable. are there some idiots protesting? certainly. but i know people who have protested and they are NOT idiots. and they are not unemployed or pooor, they are contributing citizens.

and i have no problem with people moving their money, it's their right. won't make a difference, but so what?
 
Well my money is already in a credit union because of all the BS, uneeded and bleeding fees and policies of banks. I hear such horror stories about many of the banks that I would NEVER have my money in the ones that practice such nonsense with random greedy fees for everything.

Its ridiculous and needs regulated or fixed.
 
Its ridiculous and needs regulated or fixed.

NOOOO....you're regulating the job creators...and then we'll have less jobs because then the banks will all be like "we can't take your money because there is too much regulation, sorry no more checking accounts!". Or something.
 
Not every commercial bank is nationwide, there are alot of regional banks too. Keybank in the Northeast being one example.

I'm aware of that; wasn't implying that all of them are. Just trying to illustrate that commercial banks have an advantage over smaller local/regional banks and credit unions because the big named banks are found in more cities across the country than a local/regional bank or credit union.
 
Well my money is already in a credit union because of all the BS, uneeded and bleeding fees and policies of banks. I hear such horror stories about many of the banks that I would NEVER have my money in the ones that practice such nonsense with random greedy fees for everything.

Its ridiculous and needs regulated or fixed.

You do understand that those fees are in place to off set the cost of government regulations, yes?
 
Meh. It's their money. Whether it's $10 or $100'000, they can do whatever they want with it. I don't know if it'll have any sort of impact at all. So far this OWS movement is just a large group of people expressing their views, although not in a very clear or effective way. Moving their money out of the banks is just another way of trying to get their message across. I honestly don't yet understand what they want exactly, but I'm not going to stand in their way or berate them for trying.

To to their webstie, OccupyTogether.org, click on the "Occupy WallSt" button at the top, then scroll down and click on the link to the "Delcaration to Occupy New York". You'll get a better understanding of what these people are upset about if you read the Delcaration.
 
These people are not looking to move on November 5th. They were discussing the penalty as a reason they were not making this move soon. They have already told their banks to remove them from the automatic renewal program for CDs and are looking at the options for movement. Since CDs have various lengths of deposit this won't happen on a single day or likely even within a single year, but that they removed themselves from auto-renewal indicates they are serious.

Also re: Objective Voice's post - if many of the small depositors leave the banks, where do you think the money they currently pay in fees will come from?

Large depositors, of course.
 
We promise not to eat YOU, Vance.
gee...I dont know. With all the baddass 'we have the power' 'we have the guillotine' talk...I are so skeered!!! :roll:

Of course...its really hard to take men seriously when they wear their little checkered middle eastern scarves and girl pants...all these guys need is a beret to complete the dweeby internet douchebag look...
 
That kid you are talking about that GROWS UP? Once he reaches that point is grows out of the "look at me I'm a 99% er" and begins to make responsible, reasoned, and rational decisions. He recognizes what it takes to be personally successful. Heck...he probably earns enough to provide for a family. He grows out of the 'evil corproate' mantra and recognizes who provides opportunites for growth and success...heck...he probably BECOMES part of those corporations in some capacity.

1Perry is correct here.

Every person I know who is a member with my local Credit Union also have accounts for their children at the same Credit Union. I've even had co-workers who banked w/large commercial banks ask me how they can become members at my Credit Union.

Discount it if you will, but people are starting to get very upset with banks and their underhanded dealings.
 
If your sole purpose in posting is to denounce the movement, feel free I suppose. However, I think you'd be better off trying to understand these people and see things from their perspective. As I've said before when speaking of the movement, it's not that these people are anti-capitalist but rather that they are anti-corruption. And a large part of the corruption has come through the banking system. To understand it, you have to understand that our entire economic policy for nearly 30 years has been based on financial services - consumption - primarily with the focus on our homes, i.e., how we furnish them, repair them, use them as "revolving credit". Of course, the other side has long been how we as a nation have come to rely so heavily on credit. As such, banks have taken advantage of this "national consumption based on credit" and a large part of that deals with bank transaction fees each time you use your credit or debit card. Why do you think the banks are scrambling now to raise money through retail purchases on debit/credit cards but are so willing not to charge their members for using their ATM machines? Why are they not placing limits on the amounts people keep in their checking or savings account and charging their customers if they fall below that limit? Granted, such limits usually were low - $500-$1,000 - but lately you've had banks increase that limit to $3,000 or more.

I think it was Mellie who made the point that these new fees would only hurt people who had savings/checking accounts below...5-figures. She makes a good point. However, remove enough of the common man's money out of the banking system in one foul swoop and you effectively hurt the financial system.

Never under estimate the leveraging power of the majority.
You keep talking about 'the majority' as if you actually have one. Runnign around calling yourself a 99%er doesnt mean you represent the 99%. the top 50% of people in this o****ry do just fine. They recognize change should happen and have targeted congress. You might fit in well with 'some' of them...they call themselves the 'Tea Party'. I promise you...a bunch of people with 32 dollars in their savings account threatening to move from banks to credit unions strikes fear into one group...the credit unions boards.
 
gee...I dont know. With all the baddass 'we have the power' 'we have the guillotine' talk...I are so skeered!!! :roll:

Of course...its really hard to take men seriouslhy when they wear their little checkered middle eastern scarves and girl pants...

Yeah man and little sissy boys like these wearing short skirts!!

061218_kilts_hmed_2p.hmedium.jpg

/sarcasm
 
actually, i no longer think about the tea party, although i do know that movement may have started out as grassroots but was quickly co-opted. but to pretend that one group are idiots and the other are not is laughable. are there some idiots protesting? certainly. but i know people who have protested and they are NOT idiots. and they are not unemployed or pooor, they are contributing citizens.

and i have no problem with people moving their money, it's their right. won't make a difference, but so what?
So what indeed. It is certainly their 'right'. And there were certainly some idiots within the Tea Party movement (yeah...the candidate from Nevada....whatsherface...springs to mind). Im simply amazed at the people falling all over themselves to protest bygodSOMETHINGANYTHING. Oh well...at least they finally are back in the groove...all those antiwar, antigitmo protestors have sure been quiet for the last 3 years. This is at least a boon to the placard and handheld sign industry.
 
You do understand that those fees are in place to off set the cost of government regulations, yes?
Are you talking about fees that were in affect before or after the bank bailout? I assume your against Dodd-Frank; so in the wake of that law's enactment, yes, banks decided to charge new fees (or increase the amount of old ones) in an attempt to make up for lost revenue due to the restrictions placed on excessive and/or questionable bank fees that were along the lines of fairness. But what bank fees were being charged by banks before TARP that can be traced back to unfair government regulations?

Remember: The Federal Financial Modernization Act of 1999 torn down the barriers between the morgtage, banking, insurance and investment industries and did little along the lines of federal oversight to rein in greed by these banks. Seems to me that before Dodd-Franks banks had a free hand to do damned near anything they wanted with government interferrence - until they got too greedy.
 
You keep talking about 'the majority' as if you actually have one. Runnign around calling yourself a 99%er doesnt mean you represent the 99%. the top 50% of people in this o****ry do just fine. They recognize change should happen and have targeted congress. You might fit in well with 'some' of them...they call themselves the 'Tea Party'. I promise you...a bunch of people with 32 dollars in their savings account threatening to move from banks to credit unions strikes fear into one group...the credit unions boards.

I haven't protested with the Occupiers, but I support their right to voice their grievences.

Maybe you're right; people who have small deposits in commercial banks withdrawing their peasly $25, $50, $100, $500 won't mean a hill of beans to most major banks - if small numbers do so. But imagine if you will people seeing long lines at any one bank. Think bank to what happened in 1929 when just a hand full of people did this thinking the banks would be insolvent by days' end? Now, look back to the recent past of August-October 2008...what happened when people had this very same fear about our banking system?

The image alone of long lines outside BofA, Wells Fargo, Compass, First Commercial Bank, RBC, BB&T, Regions...

Don't under estimate this challenge to the banks even if it's by what you deem as a small minority.
 
Are you talking about fees that were in affect before or after the bank bailout? I assume your against Dodd-Frank; so in the wake of that law's enactment, yes, banks decided to charge new fees (or increase the amount of old ones) in an attempt to make up for lost revenue due to the restrictions placed on excessive and/or questionable bank fees that were along the lines of fairness. But what bank fees were being charged by banks before TARP that can be traced back to unfair government regulations?

Remember: The Federal Financial Modernization Act of 1999 torn down the barriers between the morgtage, banking, insurance and investment industries and did little along the lines of federal oversight to rein in greed by these banks. Seems to me that before Dodd-Franks banks had a free hand to do damned near anything they wanted with government interferrence - until they got too greedy.

I'm talking about the Durbin amendment, that dumped millions in fees on the banks. Now, they have to recoup that money. How, you must be pondering? By passing it on to the customer, of course.

If you don't like the fees that banks are now charging, you have no one to blame but the government.

What the Durbin Amendment Means for You - My Money (usnews.com)

banks make money off of loaning money and by those loans going to term. They don't make money on loans that do not go to term. So, tell me how are banks being greedy, by making loans that they know they won't make money off of.
 
I haven't protested with the Occupiers, but I support their right to voice their grievences.

Maybe you're right; people who have small deposits in commercial banks withdrawing their peasly $25, $50, $100, $500 won't mean a hill of beans to most major banks - if small numbers do so. But imagine if you will people seeing long lines at any one bank. Think bank to what happened in 1929 when just a hand full of people did this thinking the banks would be insolvent by days' end? Now, look back to the recent past of August-October 2008...what happened when people had this very same fear about our banking system?

The image alone of long lines outside BofA, Wells Fargo, Compass, First Commercial Bank, RBC, BB&T, Regions...

Don't under estimate this challenge to the banks even if it's by what you deem as a small minority.
Great idea! lets pretend it actually HAS some sort of relative bearing on anything financially. Lets suppose we have a run on the banks. Thats going to have what kind of an impact on the economy...on the job market, on the stock market, and on...say...your 401k? Who exactly are you hoping to cripple again?
 
Back
Top Bottom